9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that limitation for filing the Appeal under Section 61 of the IBC commences after pronouncement of the order and in event, the certified copy is applied within 30 days, period which is consumed in preparation of certified copy of the order is excluded. Timelines under IBC are tightly circumscribed as has been held in V. Nagarajan [ 2021 (10) TMI 941 - SUPREME COURT (LB) ]. The judgment of this Tribunal in Ashok Tiwari [ 2023 (11) TMI 313 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI ] has no application in the facts of the present case. Since present is not a case of modification of the order. The Application filed by the Appellant in the above case for rectification of the order was partly allowed and order was m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts : Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Pranaya Goyal, Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Ms. Rati Patni, Ms. Kathleen Lobo, Ms. Nehal Gupta, Ms. Alina Merin Mathew, Ms. Sanchi Jain, Mr. Chitranshul Sinha, Mr. Sagar Bansal and Mr. Dhruv Parwal, Advocates JUDGMENT Ashok Bhushan, J. IA No.5760 of 2024 and IA No.5765 of 2024 have been filed in these two Appeals praying for condonation of 15 days delay in filing the Appeals. The impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad Court-2 was pronounced on 13.05.2024. Both the Appeals have been e-filed on 28.06.2024. The office report indicates that 30 days period expired on 12.06.2024 and the Appeal filed on 28.06.2024 i.e. 16th day after expiry of 30 da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2024. Counsel for the Appellant has relied on judgment of this Tribunal in Ashok Tiwari vs. Tattva Mittal Lifespaces Pvt. Ltd.- Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 729 of 2023 decided on 31.10.2023 to support the submission that when the order is corrected subsequently the earlier order shall merged in subsequent order and limitation can be computed from subsequent order. 5. Counsel for the Respondent submits that in view of the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in V. Nagarajan vs. SKS Ispat and Power Limited and Ors.- (2022) 2 SCC 244 , the period for limitation shall commence after the order is pronounced. It is submitted that the present case is not a modification of the order dated 13.05.2024 in any manner rather there is typographi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 30 days, period which is consumed in preparation of certified copy of the order is excluded. Timelines under IBC are tightly circumscribed as has been held in V. Nagarajan (supra). In paragraphs 25, 33 and 35 of the judgment, the Hon ble Supreme Court has laid down following:- 25. The law on limitation with respect to the IBC is settled and emphatic in its denunciation of delays. The power to condone delay is tightly circumscribed and conditional upon showing sufficient cause, even within the period of delay which is capable of being condoned. The IBC is a watershed legislation which seeks to overhaul the previous bankruptcy regime which was afflicted by delays and indefinite legal proceedings. The IBC sought to structure and streamline t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n thirty days, which can be extended up to a period of fifteen days, and no more, upon showing sufficient cause. A sleight of interpretation of procedural rules cannot be used to defeat the substantive objective of a legislation that has an impact on the economic health of a nation. 35. The appellant was present before the NCLT on 31 December 2019 when interim relief was denied and the miscellaneous application was dismissed. The appellant has demonstrated no effort on his part to secure a certified copy of the said order and has relied on the date of the uploading of the order (12 March 2020) on the website. The period of limitation for filing an appeal under Section 61(1) against the order of the NCLT dated 31 December 2019, expired on 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.05.2023. It was contended that the Appeal against the order dated 21.03.2023 was filed within time since copy was applied on 21.03.2023 and issued on 17.04.2023. In the above background, this Tribunal held that the order dated 17.01.2023 was merged with the order dated 21.03.2023 due to partial rectification. Paragraph 4 of the judgment is as follows:- 4. We have considered the submissions made by both sides and we find that the Appellant herein had filed for rectification of Order dated 17.01.2023 on 15.02.2023 which is within 30 days of the said Order. The Order dated 17.01.2023 was partly rectified vide Order dated 21.03.2023 and, excluding the period taken for obtaining the certified copy, the Appeal has been filed within 30 days of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
